"The poll of 1,500 adults by the Pew Research Center for the People &
the Press found that only 57 percent believe there is strong
scientific evidence that the Earth has gotten warmer over the past few
decades, and as a result, people are viewing the problem as less
serious. That's down from 77 percent in 2006."
The interesting word here is BELIEVE. Poll Americans on evolution
and use the word BELIEVE and you would get lower numbers. Poll
Americans on " spherical earth", and use the word BELIEVE and I'd bet
you'd get 3 or 4 percent who believe the earth is flat. Poll the
public on " the spirit world" and use the word BELIEVE, and I'd bet
the numbers would be greater than for all the others I mentioned above!
The word BELIEVE is a dangerous word to use when asking someone about
a science topic. What does the word BELIEVE have to do with
scientific evidence through experimentation or direct observation?
Yet the public seems to hook onto this attitude in all topics having
to do with science! I think this is related to some of the most
recent discussions on these forums. Recall the most recent topics:
student attitudes, cheating and attitudeson cheating on chem ed-l
and the previous topic on phys-l: data, facts, and theory.
We can never prevent the laypeople (reporters) from using the word
believe when asking science questions; that's the nature of polling
and sensationalism in so-called news stories (is this actually
news?) They will always couch the question in the simplest, possibly
the most inaccurate terms possible. But, the publics' eyes glaze over
when a scientist explains a hypothesis in accurate, detailed terms.
It's a lot easier to ask someone, "Do you believe in Evolution?" or
"Do you believe there is strong evidence for global warming?" The
evidence presented by most scientists today and which is written about
in major papers doesn't seem to be sufficient to sway a lot of people
who would rather read a paragraph about some actress's latest trist
than plow through two pages of a news report on melting icebergs or
loss of a big chunk of Antarctica.
So what's a scientist to do? I don't have the answers; only the
big question: Can science ever make headway in educating the public
in light of the dumbing down of public attitudes and lack of science
education in general?